Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) vs Intel Corporation (INTC): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-06-19, CAT is overvalued at $986, with a DCF intrinsic value of $876 and a margin of safety of -13%. INTC is overvalued at $134, with an intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. Of the two, CAT has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Caterpillar Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
- ★Caterpillar Inc. scores 75/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
- ★Free cash flow has grown at a 13.0% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
Risks
- ⚠FCF yield of 1.6% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
- ⚠Trailing P/E of 49.2x is 146% above the historical average of 20.0x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
- ⚠PEG ratio of 2.24 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
- ⚠Intel Corporation scores only 17/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
- ⚠Share count has increased by 21% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
- ⚠Insiders have sold $6.5M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
Key Valuation Metrics
Learn more →Historical Fundamentals
Learn more →Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.
Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.
Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.
$1 Retained Earnings Test
Learn more →> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis
Learn more →Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth
Learn more →What growth rate is the market pricing in at $986?
The market implies +21.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +24.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.
No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.
Forensic Accounting
Learn more →M-Score Trend
Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
Ownership Breakdown
Learn more →High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
Insider Buying Activity
Learn more →Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.
Insider Selling Activity
Learn more →Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.
🎭 Mr. Market's Mood
Learn more →"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"
"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"
Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
⚖️ Buffett Signal
Learn more →The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
Frequently Asked Questions: CAT vs INTC
Is Caterpillar Inc. or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, CAT trades at a -12.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $876 vs. price $986), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, Caterpillar Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼
CAT scores 75/100 (Wide moat), while INTC scores 17/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Is Intel Corporation in financial distress?▼
INTC's Altman Z-Score of 2.1 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. CAT scores 4.3 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.
Which company has better free cash flow, Caterpillar Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼
Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) generates a 1.6% free cash flow yield, compared to Intel Corporation's -1.2%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.
Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Caterpillar Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼
CAT earns 16.5% ROIC versus INTC's 1.7%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.